From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Tue Sep 20 23:33:40 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CED75BE3750 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:33:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94F13651; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:33:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from julian-mbp3.pixel8networks.com (50-196-156-133-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.196.156.133]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u8KNXVAg074033 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 16:33:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Cc: Alexander Motin , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= From: Julian Elischer Subject: number of xen block devices Message-ID: <73fad119-03d8-a9ea-c222-f65b22c6feac@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 16:33:26 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:33:40 -0000 hi, Is there a maximum number of block devices supported for an AMI type installation? Our tests a while back showed a limit of 14. Has that changed in 10.3? If not is it an artificial limit we can get past by simply recompiling something? Julian From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Tue Sep 20 23:50:36 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D96BE39B1 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:50:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 010001574a020428-e9afa92c-56ad-443f-bd48-8251f7810b78-000000@amazonses.com) Received: from a8-237.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-237.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.237]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87402A80 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:50:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 010001574a020428-e9afa92c-56ad-443f-bd48-8251f7810b78-000000@amazonses.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=vnqrkfnvu6csdl6mwgk5t6ix3nnepx57; d=tarsnap.com; t=1474415428; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=LaUu1R0m3l6HXF6hLf3oN9xLY+D7KXGlXdK6/WepB8w=; b=PCbz4RwgM/n2T9E6G1xdUl53p2Ukto4OE9StB1WZqB+kb5hP3RdkVOOOM5vB0IYQ 0dxFp7xhjvFMkCgv9T9i7DI+XPjzPwKkig/q+FK0ucBF7zKz/7Rvpu8c6/ZwBcVofa/ AaUJZLspiUDZyYLQTjkXsFvA7R+L3WJAIPNNLHwg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=6gbrjpgwjskckoa6a5zn6fwqkn67xbtw; d=amazonses.com; t=1474415428; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Feedback-ID; bh=LaUu1R0m3l6HXF6hLf3oN9xLY+D7KXGlXdK6/WepB8w=; b=hINvnZnJqUBZvsd3dbP+86PC+7lt9Cp8Lb96TUG7AT+af8f+dS/J+9CzO9gxotZj u2tG2IpqOU7Vp++2PU1UJ5tN/+6xrAqeXdodryYNwm717mlp5K64oGJl4uyMuHbhmE0 MsPEKBmrG1zngamlRIxF8F06vpCTjBNWj7PI8xc0= Subject: Re: number of xen block devices To: Julian Elischer , freebsd-xen@freebsd.org References: <73fad119-03d8-a9ea-c222-f65b22c6feac@freebsd.org> Cc: Alexander Motin , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= From: Colin Percival Message-ID: <010001574a020428-e9afa92c-56ad-443f-bd48-8251f7810b78-000000@email.amazonses.com> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:50:28 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <73fad119-03d8-a9ea-c222-f65b22c6feac@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SES-Outgoing: 2016.09.20-54.240.8.237 Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.Lv9FVjaNvvR5llaqfLoOVbo2VxOELl7cjN0AOyXnPlk=:AmazonSES X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:50:36 -0000 On 09/20/16 16:33, Julian Elischer wrote: > Is there a maximum number of block devices supported for an AMI type > installation? Does "AMI type installation" mean EC2? > Our tests a while back showed a limit of 14. > > Has that changed in 10.3? > > If not is it an artificial limit we can get past by simply recompiling something? There was a bug a while back which resulted in high-numbered xbd devices not showing up; I fixed that three years ago in r255051, shortly before stable/10 branched. -- Colin Percival Security Officer Emeritus, FreeBSD | The power to serve Founder, Tarsnap | www.tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoid From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Tue Sep 20 23:55:32 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB41BE3AEF for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:55:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B851AD17; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:55:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from julian-mbp3.pixel8networks.com (50-196-156-133-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.196.156.133]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u8KNtTZd074112 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 16:55:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Subject: Re: number of xen block devices To: Colin Percival , freebsd-xen@freebsd.org References: <73fad119-03d8-a9ea-c222-f65b22c6feac@freebsd.org> <010001574a0207f9-d12e326c-e152-49f9-9763-2cf0161f7458-000000@email.amazonses.com> Cc: Alexander Motin , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= From: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <3132e8d0-68db-940f-5cb1-22fe01b52480@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 16:55:24 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <010001574a0207f9-d12e326c-e152-49f9-9763-2cf0161f7458-000000@email.amazonses.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:55:32 -0000 On 20/09/2016 4:50 PM, Colin Percival wrote: > On 09/20/16 16:33, Julian Elischer wrote: >> Is there a maximum number of block devices supported for an AMI type >> installation? > Does "AMI type installation" mean EC2? yes > >> Our tests a while back showed a limit of 14. >> >> Has that changed in 10.3? >> >> If not is it an artificial limit we can get past by simply recompiling something? > There was a bug a while back which resulted in high-numbered xbd > devices not showing up; I fixed that three years ago in r255051, > shortly before stable/10 branched. that may be what we were seeing. I'll know in a few days. > From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Wed Sep 21 09:09:51 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEADDBE2476 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:09:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B78E0780 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:09:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u8L99pge042350 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:09:51 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 212681] I/O is slow for FreeBSD DOMu on XenServer Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:09:51 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.3-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: performance X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: royger@freebsd.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:09:51 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D212681 --- Comment #17 from Roger Pau Monn=C3=83=C2=A9 --- Hello, Just a wild guess, but could you try to disable indirect descriptors to see= if that makes a difference? AFAIK XenServer block backends don't implement it,= but it doesn't hurt to try. Just add: hw.xbd.xbd_enable_indirect=3D"0" To your /boot/loader.conf. Thanks, Roger. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Wed Sep 21 12:44:55 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15AC5BE17D2 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:44:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 055552E1 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:44:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u8LCir5c088226 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:44:54 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 212681] I/O is slow for FreeBSD DOMu on XenServer Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:44:53 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.3-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: performance X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: rainer@ultra-secure.de X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:44:55 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D212681 --- Comment #18 from rainer@ultra-secure.de --- Hi, thanks - but it does not make a notable difference. Neither for the dc3dd -wipe test, nor for my real-world testcase. I can create a tenant on CloudStack, so you can try it yourself - if you wa= nt. But I have no problem running tests, commands etc. for you, either - I can devote (almost) as much time on this as it takes. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Wed Sep 21 16:13:36 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 075C6BE48B3 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 16:13:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com) Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3FDA357 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 16:13:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com) Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id t7so50363300qkh.2 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:13:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tenebras-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=nYnRguVjG4F7K0jER+ams1YvxzUeRyFt0ykmHgTbdJQ=; b=NQq7RkX02qz7TrUaLMETOv1AAImYKuv7ZVsIoYG7+7UDZ1jwDtXnHyw5VYX68EeOn6 v/NLXJM93UycFuzxLWuSJW2xgJ4DmKK7B2PaY4xk8+tex2r7GRdz9rObhuwnW9Nc/nzh wSnsumGqmaJzm3iZKUGdP2yTNVINnMQvOMqH5wUowKZ3dFLMqm+S7b8jTa7oc+FGoi0S EeantDS5TTJ096nBbjeK2HZ7q7Xef/NfpdxOJ8ajhpGqpErlTaTacgeBQOqqo/qeaWy/ 0Yi/uvZu3ASeCLFA+oNriq8TDE7DCYci8iLiaSvpz4/cjk6YduurwgUnTVFGjtRJZPon kq4A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=nYnRguVjG4F7K0jER+ams1YvxzUeRyFt0ykmHgTbdJQ=; b=Wfjp3Ysg74St4KTn4vKU9fj13VC0dqYMCMll3WrmmcMAUPOze98ivFo9unG7NuZS4j 1ufUV8bKqMFzK7MLFskiMFV97fSOwY3ad3feh9mxNElywkzSzf/PxSbm+Mn53tKctnc7 D8WbNFwi7AQ9JQ3hqeqFlYy3YNhykg3lImLKGCtgse1yI9U/KThg12WK7A9LqoP5SbGb pchvhctrAqdSunbQMqs51Rm5YnxAxOLBS4uOP3guQjTHMxKyQRiQ0uPxjyrkqGMdq7kY 3cQx9CcCe/nbNvqxTtJa+m+r7qIMfG2o8IAFfA5ujAsHGz8Ers6lzgCRWG3Ywgw3M5hr 60uQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPA9HELTgV8gbYyQbvBc91/cCzHuHjNtRvdYZ9mwu1HdhvjXIMMikaApKVz/adBMsnG66Z9SUlrhWLBeAHI X-Received: by 10.55.116.134 with SMTP id p128mr41463803qkc.38.1474474414782; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:13:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.52.77 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:13:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.200.52.77 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:13:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3132e8d0-68db-940f-5cb1-22fe01b52480@freebsd.org> References: <73fad119-03d8-a9ea-c222-f65b22c6feac@freebsd.org> <010001574a0207f9-d12e326c-e152-49f9-9763-2cf0161f7458-000000@email.amazonses.com> <3132e8d0-68db-940f-5cb1-22fe01b52480@freebsd.org> From: Michael Sierchio Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:13:34 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: number of xen block devices To: Julian Elischer Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= , FreeBSD Lists , Colin Percival , Alexander Motin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 16:13:36 -0000 Also check if there is a resource limit imposed by AWS. If you are bumping into that, a simple request can get the limit raised for a particular availability zone. On Sep 20, 2016 16:55, "Julian Elischer" wrote: > On 20/09/2016 4:50 PM, Colin Percival wrote: > >> On 09/20/16 16:33, Julian Elischer wrote: >> >>> Is there a maximum number of block devices supported for an AMI type >>> installation? >>> >> Does "AMI type installation" mean EC2? >> > yes > >> >> Our tests a while back showed a limit of 14. >>> >>> Has that changed in 10.3? >>> >>> If not is it an artificial limit we can get past by simply recompiling >>> something? >>> >> There was a bug a while back which resulted in high-numbered xbd >> devices not showing up; I fixed that three years ago in r255051, >> shortly before stable/10 branched. >> > that may be what we were seeing. > I'll know in a few days. > > >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Wed Sep 21 18:26:32 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33829BE2893 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 18:26:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 010001574dffc3a9-b9aa811c-ac09-45b3-9aea-1be72fcaab67-000000@amazonses.com) Received: from a8-237.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-237.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.237]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC424E00 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 18:26:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 010001574dffc3a9-b9aa811c-ac09-45b3-9aea-1be72fcaab67-000000@amazonses.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=vnqrkfnvu6csdl6mwgk5t6ix3nnepx57; d=tarsnap.com; t=1474482390; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=FJF1eWoSuFFFSx3SYw+B16EBtQ6Osf1RbDYQDJ1BkLw=; b=Oc7XjqAWrgi4mYDoil5ZndHgdKXXnZd7GcXhbmoFke565gp82EQzwIO0oQXv1gDC HSFdeQzzdrd62vAmzJOtN44nYP861zcMclk93i8VmkEM/ffchHwf2NiJVXSOs7D5nYx oLb5B8yy6OID0ZQjWUEi60AfO8WytOn91NnQsMVA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=6gbrjpgwjskckoa6a5zn6fwqkn67xbtw; d=amazonses.com; t=1474482390; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Feedback-ID; bh=FJF1eWoSuFFFSx3SYw+B16EBtQ6Osf1RbDYQDJ1BkLw=; b=YFcSPVnyVaXJ1Nso3mjE4K3PWvQi9ol5MdRakpnJvXaHMmeG18Bnq8bLx4EaRYvx xCpIFjfKC60lEjkzB9Z970vpeGt0eDbbvXF1/Mi8xMGTDD+9KNnE6FMVd20BiCEjNa1 cNJroNY1HMVzCYt6ZEy5Mlb8yX5RVJlVG6ZEALac= Subject: Re: number of xen block devices To: Michael Sierchio , Julian Elischer References: <73fad119-03d8-a9ea-c222-f65b22c6feac@freebsd.org> <010001574a0207f9-d12e326c-e152-49f9-9763-2cf0161f7458-000000@email.amazonses.com> <3132e8d0-68db-940f-5cb1-22fe01b52480@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Lists From: Colin Percival Message-ID: <010001574dffc3a9-b9aa811c-ac09-45b3-9aea-1be72fcaab67-000000@email.amazonses.com> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 18:26:30 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SES-Outgoing: 2016.09.21-54.240.8.237 Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.Lv9FVjaNvvR5llaqfLoOVbo2VxOELl7cjN0AOyXnPlk=:AmazonSES X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 18:26:32 -0000 On 09/21/16 09:13, Michael Sierchio wrote: > Also check if there is a resource limit imposed by AWS. If you are bumping > into that, a simple request can get the limit raised for a particular > availability zone. AWS limits can be an issue, but it would be a limit on the number or size of the EBS volumes can *create*. Once volumes are created, AWS limits won't affect whether you can attach them to instances or whether the instances can see the attached volumes, so I doubt that's what Julian was running into. -- Colin Percival Security Officer Emeritus, FreeBSD | The power to serve Founder, Tarsnap | www.tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoid